1. United States
2. Texas
3. Letter

I’m writing to urge you to scrutinize President Trump’s public statements and policy direction regarding the “straight protection fees” and any shift from earlier positions on charging for access to international waterways. Trump first described the idea of the United States collecting “protection fees” in a way that is widely understood as mob-style extortion. That framing matters, because it suggests a coercive approach rather than a rules-based one. You will also note that before the United States became more involved in conflicts connected to the region, the Strait’s shipping routes were functioning as open and freely flowing traffic. This is directly relevant when evaluating claims about security, economic impact, and the justification for policy changes. I’m further concerned about apparent inconsistency: earlier statements from senior officials reportedly argued that no fees should be charged for free waterways, yet the President later backtracked and said other countries would “invest in” the United States for an open route. Those statements together create a clear perception of quid pro quo—especially in the broader context of prior U.S. decisions, including the launch of an ill-advised war of choice. At minimum, Congress should require clarity and accountability on: - What the United States is asking for (fees vs. “investment,” and on what legal and diplomatic basis). - Whether any payments would be tied to access, security guarantees, or specific policy concessions. - The legal theory under international law governing passage through the strait and how any U.S. role is justified. - The cost, risk, and escalation implications of expanding U.S. security commitments tied to shipping. - Whether decision-making reflects strategy and competence, or improvisation that increases risk to Americans and destabilizes the region. I ask you to use your oversight role to demand documents, testimony, and a written explanation of the policy rationale and legal basis for any shift toward payments or “investments” by other countries. I also ask you to push for a clear, public, rules-based approach that protects open navigation without veering into coercive arrangements.